The present invention is concerned in general with circuit arrangements which alter the dynamic range of signals, namely compressors which compress the dynamic range and expanders which expand the dynamic range. While the invention is useful for treating various types of signals, including audio signals and video (television) signals, the description of the invention is primarily in the context of the processing of audio signals. The principles of the invention may be applied to the processing of other signals by modifying the disclosed embodiments by applying known techniques. For example, compressors and expanders for video signals can act instantaneously and do not require syllabic control circuitry.
Compressors and expanders are normally used together (a compander system) to effect noise reduction; the signal is compressed before transmission or recording and expanded after reception or playback from the transmission channel However, compressors may be used alone to reduce the dynamic range, e.g., to suit the capacity of a transmission channel, without subsequent expansion when the compressed signal is adequate for the end purpose. In addition, compressors alone are used in certain products, especially audio products which are intended only to transmit or record compressed broadcast or pre-recorded signals. Expanders alone are used in certain products, especially audio products which are intended only to receive or play back already compressed broadcast or pre-recorded signals. In certain products, a single device is often configured for switchable mode operation as a compressor to record signals and as an expander to play back compressed broadcast or pre-recorded signals.
One long sought after goal in the design of compressors, expanders and companding type noise reduction systems is a high degree of adaptiveness of the compressor and expander to applied signals. That is, the compressor, for example, ideally should provide constant gain throughout its frequency spectrum of operation except at the frequency of a dominant signal component where it would provide dynamic action according to a predetermined compression law. This goal was referred to as "conformal equalization" in U.K. Provisional Specification No. 43136 filed Oct. 11, 1965 by this inventor. Accordingly, that document (along with two other U.K. Provisional Specifications of this inventor, Nos. 34394 and 02368, filed Aug. 11, 1965 and Jan. 18, 1966, respectively) and subsequent patents derived therefrom (including U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,846,719 and 3,903,485) employed several techniques directed to achieving that goal, including, among others, techniques now commonly known as "bandsplitting" and "sliding band".
According to the bandsplitting approach, the spectrum is divided into a plurality of frequency bands, each of which is acted upon independently. In that way a dominant signal component affects dynamic action (compression or expansion) only within a portion of the overall spectrum, in contrast to a wideband approach in which dynamic action throughout the entire spectrum is affected by a dominant signal component. Thus, a bandsplitting system provides a greater degree of adaptiveness or conformance than a wideband system. In theory, a highly adaptive or conformal system could be provided by dividing the overall spectrum into a very large number of frequency bands; however, the complexity and cost of such an arrangement makes it impractical. Consequently, a design compromise is made by selecting a reasonable number of frequency bands capable of providing satisfactory performance. In one well known commercially successful bandsplitting companding type audio noise reduction system (commonly known as A-type noise reduction) four bands are employed ("An Audio Noise Reduction System", by Ray Dolby, J. Audio Eng. Soc., October 1967, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 383-388). However, such systems suffer from the same problems as does a wideband noise reduction system, although to a lesser degree because the band is divided up and the problems tend to be confined to the individual bands. These problems are well known in the design of noise reduction systems and include loss of noise reduction effect and the related problems of noise modulation and signal modulation at frequencies not masked by the dominant signal component when a change of gain takes place in response to a dominant signal component. Such problems are chiefly a result of a system failing to be perfectly conformant to the dominant signal. The degree to which such problems are audible also depends on how far the system departs from perfect complementarity. If, for example, the transmission channel response is irregular or unpredictable within the passband of the compressor and expander, then signal modulation effects will not be compensated in the expander.
A dominant signal component is a signal component having a substantial enough level so as to effect dynamic action within the frequency band under consideration. Under complex signal conditions there may be more than one dominant signal component or a dominant signal component and sub-dominant signal components. In a compander system which relies on complementarity of the compressor and expander, all of the signal components must be compressed and expanded in accordance with a defined compression/expansion law in order that the signal spectrum including the dominant signal component (and other signals affected by dynamic action) can be restored to their correct levels in the expander. This requirement excludes the usefulness in compander systems of various known adaptive and tracking filter techniques and so-called "single ended" noise reduction systems (which operate only on a reproduced signal) in which the filter action is not subject to predetermined compression/expansion laws and whose action may be unpredictable in the presence of multiple signals.
Another approach useful in working toward the goal of increased adaptiveness or conformance is the sliding band technique, which employs signal dependent variable filtering to achieve limiting. Generally, a dominant signal component causes the cutoff or turnover frequency (or frequencies) of one or more variable filters (e.g., high pass, low pass, shelf, notch, etc.) to shift so as to compress or expand the dominant signal component.
A sliding band system operating only in a single high frequency band is described in U.S. Pat. Re No. 28,426 and U.S. Pat. No. 4,490,691. This system, which forms the basis for the well known consumer companding type audio noise reduction system known as B-type noise reduction, includes, in a dual path arrangement, a side path having a fixed high pass filter in series with a variable filter.
A "dual path" arrangement is one in which a compression or expansion characteristic is achieved through the use of a main path which is essentially free of dynamic action and one or more secondary or side paths having dynamic action. The side path or paths take their input from the input or output of the main path and their output or outputs are additively or subtractively combined with the main path in order to provide compression or expansion. Generally, a side path provides a type of limiting or variable attenuation and the manner in which it is connected to the main path determines if it boosts (to provide compression) or bucks (to provide expansion) the main path signal components. Such dual path arrangements are described in detail in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,846,719; 3,903,485; 4,490,691 and U.S. Pat. Re No. 28,426.
A high frequency variable shelving filter in a single path arrangement (e.g., the dynamic action is accomplished in a single signal path) for a companding audio noise reduction system is set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 3,911,371. In the embodiments of FIGS. 1 and 2 of U.S. Pat. No. 3,665,345 a dual path arrangement is set forth in which the side path comprises a variable shelving filter having an all-pass characteristic in its quiescent condition. Another approach for providing a variable shelving response for compander systems is set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 3,934,190.
One drawback of these sliding band arrangements is that in the presence of a dominant high frequency signal component the variable filter turnover frequency shifts to a frequency above that signal component thereby restricting the frequency area at lower frequencies in which noise reduction is provided. The loss of noise reduction may be more noticeable audibly than in bandsplitting systems and the related side effects (noise modulation and signal modulation) may be more severe than in fixed band arrangements because of a multiplication effect that is inherent in sliding band systems. This effect results from the way in which sliding band systems provide compression. If, for example, there is a dominant high frequency signal and 2 dB of gain reduction is required at that frequency, the variable filter cutoff frequency should shift to the extent necessary to provide that amount of attenuation along the filter slope. However, for lower frequencies, further removed from the new filter cutoff frequency, the effect may be 5 or 10 dB of dynamic action, for example, with a consequent loss of all or most of the noise reduction effect along with possible audible signal or noise modulation. In other words, in this example, a 2 dB change in a dominant signal can cause a 5 or 10 dB change in gain at frequencies removed from the dominant signal. FIG. 1 illustrates this effect. This problem is called the "mid-band modulation effect", which occurs under relatively rare conditions when very high frequency dominant signal components (cymbals, for example) control the sliding band filter. There may be audible modulation of non-dominant mid-band signal components that are also present if the expander does not properly track the compressor. One approach in solving the problem is set forth in said U.S. Pat. No. 4,490,691.
In a fixed band arrangement the same amount of gain reduction would occur throughout the frequency band (whether wide band or one frequency band of a bandsplitting system) in response to a dominant signal component. Thus, while signal or noise modulation may occur, there is no multiplication of the effect a 2 dB change in the level of a dominant signal component would cause a 2 dB change in gain at frequencies removed from the dominant signal component. However, viewed from the standpoint of noise reduction effect this is a disadvantage of a fixed band arrangement--the full noise reduction effect is not obtained anywhere within the frequency band of operation when limiting occurs in response to a dominant signal component. FIG. 2 illustrates this effect. Although it is not multiplied, there is also the potential for noise and signal modulation throughout the entire frequency band in which the fixed band action occurs.
Despite the disadvantages mentioned, an advantage of a sliding band arrangement is that the full noise reduction effect is obtained at frequencies above the dominant signal component (or below the dominant signal component in the case of a sliding band system acting downard in frequency). Thus an arrangement that achieves the advantages of fixed band and sliding band systems (e.g., the advantage of fixed band is that there is no multiplication of modulation effects and the advantge of sliding is that there is minimum signal or noise modulation the dominant signal frequency) without the disadvantages of each (e.g., the disadvantage of fixed band is noise and signal modulation throughout its operating range--although not multiplied and the disadvantage of sliding band is the mid-band modulation effect) would be desirable.
Although it is known to employ fixed band and sliding band actions in separate frequency bands of bandspltting arrangements and to employ more than one dynamic action within the same frequency band, prior art arrangements have not obtained the above noted advantages of fixed band and sliding band action by employing those actions simultaneously in substantially the same frequency band.